Agreed, I think my law abiding child should not be penalized by having his education paused to practice how to hide during a mass shooting.
Oh, are you under the impression that gun owners are the only law abiding people harmed by society’s reaction to criminals with guns?
How adorable.
For the most part, the change in the law is to ban semi-autos and military style weapons.
The Arms Act (as amended) http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/consol_act/aa198368.pdfhttp://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/consol_act/aa198368.pdf
and the amending act http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/consol_act/afmapaa2019496.pdf
(Mac Tech)
NRA nutjob unleashing all the usual cliches.
I’m puzzled. There are only about 4 million Kiwis. Howcum there are 175,000 assault rifles out there?
A point made elsewhere is that many of the guns used in crimes in the USA were stolen from legitimate owners. Firstly, restrict the type of guns that private citizens can keep at home. Assuming that you have a self-defense need, why do you need military weapons for that? Secondly, owners of military weapons must keep them either at a secure firing range or in some other secure facility, but not at home. Thirdly, require all firearms kept at home to be stored securely, with guns and ammunition separate. (This is a requirement in many countries. Is it so onerous?) Fourthly, require that all thefts of firearms are reported immediately.
None of this affects a basic right to own guns of any kind. Needless to add, have heavy penalties for the illegal possession or use of a gun. But, given the situation in the USA, it is pointless trying to impose any controls unless it is done nationwide. Libertarians can discuss that issue at their leisure.
Not an NRA member, don’t agree with their money-grubbing begging techniques.
since there’s a cultural difference between NZ and US, i’m stepping out of this one, sorry for the sidetracking.
Would you expand that approach to other illegal substances, acquired by criminal means?
Can the local drug dealer walk into the cop shop with a pound of coke and ask to be paid 90% of market value?
Can the guy who stole someone’s gun expect to be paid for it?
Can the guy who illegally brought prohibited full auto guns into the country get paid?
Te reason for the compensation is to acknowledge that the rules have changed and to compensate people whil legally acquired guns that they now cannot legally posses. It’s a small scale expropriation of legal property and compensation is owed.
That doesn’t apply to people who have illegally acquired guns.
Yes, let’s look at Great Britan [sic] which has indeed implemented a ban on carrying most knives. And it was an effective one; not only is gun crime at a very low level (thanks to the gun ban, which affects both law-abiding and criminal individuals), knife crime was plummeting as well…until the Conservatives decided that they’d rather spend taxpayer money on tax cuts for rich people than police, and police officer numbers fell by 20,000. Funnily enough, crime figures across the board began to rise again, including knife crime.
If your argument is that banning lethal weapons significantly reduces homicides committed with those weapons, you’re absolutely right - they work as long as you have reasonable resources to enforce them. However, if you are looking at the situation in the UK and assuming that this means there should be more guns, you really don’t understand the situation in the UK at all.
BTW, the UK also now requires OTC medications including aspirin to be sold in small foil packs rather than large bottles. Why? Because people were trying to commit suicide on the spur of the moment by swallowing large quantities of pills. Often this resulted not in death but in liver failure, not only causing problems for the individual but putting a strain on the NHS and the transplant list. So now you can only buy packs of 16 pills, and the attempted-suicide-by-pill numbers fell drastically to the general benefit of society.
So it’s interesting to note that what you posted in jest about restricting harms by restricting access to causes of harm is actually quite a sensible approach.
nm - double post
I suppose you could donate them to charity (the illegal gun owners, that is), or simply restrict the cray-cray guns to secure ranges at which the owners can visit and use them on each other, or pet them or sniff them or whatever it is they do with them – just keep practicing the fetish restricted to a safe supervised place.
It’s funny how some people are with their beliefs – religion, firearms, racism. Facts, logic, and non-fallacious analysis should do the trick, but it simply doesn’t. More’s the pity that innocent people die because of other people’s beliefs.